Skip to main content

Verifying Smart Card Applications: An ASM Approach

  • Conference paper
Integrated Formal Methods (IFM 2007)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 4591))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We present Prosecco, a formal model for security protocols of smart card applications, based on Abstract State Machines (ASM) [BS03],[Gur95], and a suitable method for verifying security properties of such protocols. The main part of this article describes the structure of the protocol ASM and all its relevant parts. Our modeling technique enables an attacker model exactly tailored to the application, instead of only an attacker similar to the Dolev-Yao model. We also introduce a proof technique for security properties of the protocols. Properties are proved in the KIV system using symbolic execution and invariants. Furthermore we describe a graphical notation based on UML diagrams that allows to specify the important parts of the application in a simple way.

Our formal approach is exemplified with a small e-commerce application. We use an electronic wallet to demonstrate the ASM-based protocol model and we also show what the proof obligations of some of the security properties look like.

This work is sponsored by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Accorsi, R., Basin, D., Viganò, L.: Towards an awareness-based semantics for security protocol analysis. In: Goubault-Larrecq, J. (ed.) Workshop on Logical Aspects of Cryptographic Protocol Verification, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R.J., Needham, R.M.: Programming Satan’s Computer. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Computer Science Today. LNCS, vol. 1000, Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrows, M., Abadi, M., Needham, R.M.: A Logic of Authentication. Technical report, SRC Research Report 39 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bella, G.: Mechanising a Protocol for Smart Cards. In: Attali, S., Jensen, T. (eds.) E-smart 2001. LNCS, vol. 2140, Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Basin, D., Mödersheim, S., Viganò, L.: An On-The-Fly Model-Checker for Security Protocol Analysis. In: Snekkenes, E., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2808, pp. 253–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Börger, E.: The ASM Refinement Method. Formal Aspects of Computing, 15(1-2) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bella, G., Riccobene, E.: Formal Analysis of the Kerberos Authentication System. Journal of Universal Computer Science 3(12), 1337–1381 (1997)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bella, G., Riccobene, E.: A Realistic Environment for Crypto-Protocol Aalyses by ASMs. In: Glässer, U., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Proc. 5th Int. Workshop on Abstract State Machines, Magdeburg University (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Balser, M., Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Stenzel, K., Thums, A.: Formal system development with KIV. In: Maibaum, T.S.E. (ed.) ETAPS 2000 and FASE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1783, Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Börger, E., Stärk, R.F.: Abstract State Machines—A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Derrick, J., Wehrheim, H.: Using Coupled Simulations in Non-atomic Refinement. In: Bert, D., Bowen, J.P., King, S., Walden, M. (eds.) ZB 2003. LNCS, vol. 2651, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolev, D., Yao, A.C.: On the security of public key protocols. In: Proc. 22th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, IEEE, Los Alamitos (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fábrega, F.J.T., Herzog, J.C., Guttman, J.D.: Strand Spaces: Proving Security Protocols Correct. Journal of Computer Security 7, 191–230 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Grandy, H., Haneberg, D., Reif, W., Stenzel, K.: Developing Provably Secure M-Commerce Applications. In: Müller, G. (ed.) ETRICS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3995, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grandy, H., Stenzel, K., Reif, W.: A Refinement Method for Java Programs. Technical Report 2006-29, University of Augsburg (December 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurevich, Y.: Evolving algebras 1993: Lipari guide. In: Börger, E. (ed.) Specification and Validation Methods, Oxford Univ. Press, New York (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Haneberg, D.: Sicherheit von Smart Card – Anwendungen. PhD thesis, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany (in German) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Haneberg, D., Grandy, H., Reif, W., Schellhorn, G.: Verifying Smart Card Applications: An ASM Approach. Technical Report 2006-08, Universität Augsburg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J.: Dynamic Logic. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Haneberg, D., Reif, W., Stenzel, K.: A Method for Secure Smartcard Applications. In: Kirchner, H., Ringeissen, C. (eds.) AMAST 2002. LNCS, vol. 2422, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haneberg, D., Schellhorn, G., Grandy, H., Reif, W.: Verification of Mondex Electronic Purses with KIV: From Transactions to a Security Protocol. Technical Report 2006-32, University of Augsburg (December 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jürjens, J.: UMLsec: Extending UML for Secure Systems Development. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002 - The Unified Modeling Language 5th International Conference. LNCS, vol. 2460, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jürjens, J.: Secure Systems Development with UML. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Web presentation of KIV projects. URL: http://www.informatik.uniaugsburg.de/swt/projects/

  • Lowe, G.: Breaking and fixing the Needham-Schroeder public-key protocol using FDR. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) TACAS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1055, pp. 147–166. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nipkow, T.: Hoare logics for recursive procedures and unbounded nondeterminism. In: Bradfield, J.C. (ed.) CSL 2002 and EACSL 2002. LNCS, vol. 2471, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • The Object Management Group (OMG). OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification Version 1.5 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulson, L.C.: The inductive approach to verifying cryptographic protocols. Journal of Computer Security 6, 85–128 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulson, L.C.: Verifying the SET Protocol. In: Goré, R.P., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) IJCAR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2083, Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., Booch, G.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S.A., Goldsmith, M.H., Lowe, G., Roscoe, B.: The Modelling and Analysis of Security Protocols: the CSP Approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Stenzel, K., Balser, M.: Structured specifications and interactive proofs with KIV. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—A Basis for Applications, Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellhorn, G.: Verification of ASM Refinements Using Generalized Forward Simulation. Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS) 7(11), 952–979 (2001) URL: http://www.jucs.org

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Schellhorn, G.: ASM Refinement and Generalizations of Forward Simulation in Data Refinement: A Comparison. Journal of Theoretical Computer Science 336(2-3), 403–435 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Stepney, S., Cooper, D., Woodcock, J.: AN ELECTRONIC PURSE Specification, Refinement, and Proof. In: Technical monograph PRG-126, July 2000, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Oxford (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellhorn, G., Grandy, H., Haneberg, D., Möbius, N., Reif, W.: A systematic verification Approach for Mondex Electronic Purses using ASMs. Technical Report 2006-27, Universität Augsburg, Augsburg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellhorn, G., Grandy, H., Haneberg, D., Möbius, N., Reif, W.: A Systematic Verification Approach for Mondex Electronic Purses using ASMs. In: Abrial, J.-R., Glässer, U. (eds.) Proceedings of the Dagstuhl Seminar on Rigorous Methods for Software Construction and Analysis. LNCS, Springer, Heidelberg (submitted, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellhorn, G., Grandy, H., Haneberg, D., Reif, W.: The Mondex Challenge: Machine Checked Proofs for an Electronic Purse. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Sekerinski, E. (eds.) FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4085, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stenzel, K.: A formally verified calculus for full Java Card. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST 2004. LNCS, vol. 3116, Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Jim Davies Jeremy Gibbons

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Haneberg, D., Grandy, H., Reif, W., Schellhorn, G. (2007). Verifying Smart Card Applications: An ASM Approach. In: Davies, J., Gibbons, J. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4591. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73210-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73210-5_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-73209-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-73210-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy